SPUR is a non-profit (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Planning_and_Urban_Research_Association">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Planning_and_Urban_Research_Association</a>)<div>but they published a voting guide -- <a href="http://www.spur.org/blog/2011-10-11/spurs-2011-voter-guide-now-online">http://www.spur.org/blog/2011-10-11/spurs-2011-voter-guide-now-online</a> -- where they do not endorce candidates, but announce their official positions on each of the prop&#39;s.</div>
<div><br></div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Leif Ryge <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:leif@synthesize.us">leif@synthesize.us</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">On 11/07/2011 02:43 PM, Olya K wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
So I think its ok then to discuss, take a stance, as an organization, on<br>
certain issues, and, possibly even suggest how to vote on the prop&#39;s,<br>
but not actually endorse candidates?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
That is not my reading; I&#39;m (not a lawyer but) pretty sure 501(c)(3)s taking stances on ballot measures is not OK.<br>
<br>
See these two pages (from the references on that wikipedia article):<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.npaction.org/article/articleview/183/1/116" target="_blank">http://www.npaction.org/<u></u>article/articleview/183/1/116</a><br>
<a href="http://www.npaction.org/article/articleview/396/1/276" target="_blank">http://www.npaction.org/<u></u>article/articleview/396/1/276</a><br>
<br>
Also keep in mind that at the end of the day the IRS&#39; interpretation of the law is what really matters... Wherever the line actually is, I think it is best not to approach it.<br><font color="#888888">
<br>
~leif<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br></div>